Rules of Thirds - DPChallenge Forums

11/10/2003 05:06:13 PM · #3

Exhibit I:

Every image imposes its own rules.
Looking at many images reveals that a rule governing one may be successfully applied to another.

Exhibit II:

An appealing image can be made without any knowledge of rules extraneous to that image. It presupposes a very good eye and not the kind of stance and process that comes via casual acquaintance.

An appealing image cannot be created without any interest in or awareness of compositional laws other than as a result of the law of probability, via sheer number.

Exhibit II:

Compositional laws are in effect whether a photographer is aware of them or not.

11/10/2003 05:14:24 PM · #4

11/10/2003 05:23:28 PM · #5

The RULE of thirds is really a misnomer.

It is not a rule, or a law, it is more akin to a suggestion.

I agree, in many cases it can greatly improve a photo, but not in every case.

It is more of a good guideline, something to consider ... not something that absolutely HAS to be adhered to no matter what.

11/10/2003 07:08:57 PM · #6

Natator

I know. I was only joking with zeuszen. As usual he was very poetic and to the point with his explanation of [THE RULE OF THIRDS]. Iâ��m sorry; Iâ��ll have to be more serious in future.

11/10/2003 07:24:49 PM · #7

*laugh*

Not at all jmritz :)

My post actually wasn't aimed at yours in any way at all. I was referring back to Faidoi's original post and basically agreeing that people should not vote down because of a rule not being met, as it is not a "law" :)

Do not be more serious, or you will be forced to enter a photo of a cat for every challenge, as others have been forced to do in the past for some attrocious crime they have presumably committed ;)

Message edited by author 2003-11-10 19:26:15.

11/10/2003 07:32:40 PM · #8

You mean like this!

11/10/2003 07:39:39 PM · #9

Yes exactly. Was that for the "insects", the "Urban Landscapes" or the "Photo of your dog" challenge?

Just imagine life being able to not submit anything other than a photo of your cat!
Mwwwwaaahhhaaa!!

Natator

P.S. I must learn how to spell "Mwwwwaaahhhaaa" right!

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

11/10/2003 07:45:37 PM · #10

Meow?

:)

Spork99

OM System OM-1

11/10/2003 07:47:56 PM · #11

I think the "Rule of Thirds" should be re-named the "Recommendation of Thirds" or "Suggestion of Thirds". While composing an image along the thirds is typically a good idea, many photographs, especially those trying to portray the subject as static or monumental benefit from a symmetric composition.

Message edited by drewmedia - Bad Signature.

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

11/10/2003 07:48:52 PM · #12

Originally posted by faidoi:

Did they tell you they voted it down because of this? In a lot of cases, the shot will be more interesting by applying this 'guideline' when you compose your shot. It's not necessarily your subject that should be composed at a third for the interest, but maybe a point of interest on/near your subject. Without seeing the image, it's hard to say. What's your own evaluation of the comment?

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

11/10/2003 07:49:33 PM · #13

Just a test

Message edited by drewmedia - Bad Signature.

11/10/2003 08:03:15 PM · #14

Just a quick example, using that cat photo.

First one.

Now using the rule of thirds.

I would guess it works???

11/10/2003 08:09:36 PM · #15

Yes, it certainly does work. I know many of my early entries would have benefitted from the "rule" Some photos do not though. One I am doing for titles doesn't have the leeway to do that without breaking challenge rules.

What a lovely cat photo jmritz, you are to be congratulated.

I never managed to get the cats I needed for my book title shot (101 uses of a dead cat) so had to shoot, if you'll pardon the pun, something else instead ;)

11/10/2003 08:14:07 PM · #16

The poor guy (cat) has a sinus problem, his eyes and nose are continuously running. Wonderful cat though.

Thanks for the kind words also.

Message edited by author 2003-11-10 20:14:52.

zeuszen

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D

11/10/2003 10:19:10 PM · #17

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

While your conclusion is poignantly correct, the Rule of Thirds is only one of many laws governing the composition and perception of images. It is different from a suggestion or recommendation in that it is derived from the study of many images, over epochs at that. It is a (one) law as inherent in a store of images available to us as a law governing the natural sciences. It primarily adresses balance, not alone in the way it enhances stability and order in a given locale, but also in the way we perceive such phenomena, taking into account the forces of convention and habit.

While I am inclined to question 'conventions' without reserve, I'd tread more carefully when it comes to traditions of creating which have a scientific base. In other words, if something's rotten, it'll give. If it's sound, why knock it?

The Rule of Thirds, here, I note, has a lot of attention, perhaps because it is easy to discern. All kinds of coherences govern balance in a picture. In the end, I believe, there is no sinecure. I say, look at the picture.
Study it. Look at many pictures. Compare.

Then, if you must, vote.

David Ey

Nikon D80

11/10/2003 11:33:52 PM · #18

Actually I like the first one best...distracting garbage at both top and bottom for a better balance. Nice cat though.

BobsterLobster

Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

11/11/2003 08:34:10 AM · #19

I think the photos I mention rule of thirds on the most when I comment are those of animals.
Image a plain background, now imagine an animal that takes up an area of the frame that is not too large.
Now imagine that the animal is placed splat in the middle of the frame... the centre of the body is also at the centre of the frame.
This is VERY unimaginative and doesn't work for several reasons.
Firstly, the eyes are the natural focus of a photo of an animal, and if anything needs to be in the centre of the frame, it should be the eyes.
Secondly, with nothing else going on in the frame, there is no flow to the space around the animal. It quickly becomes boring to look at.
Now imagine the same shot with the eyes at one of the 3rds intersection points. The eyes are looking in the direction of most of the negative space. Much better! The negative space is now part of the composition, rather than an afterthought. The eyes of the animal are placed harmoniously. The frame is arranged seemingly more imaginatively. Every part of the frame works with the rest.
This can obviously apply to much more than animals.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

11/11/2003 09:04:21 AM · #20

Originally posted by zeuszen:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I think the "Rule of Thirds" should be re-named the "Recommendation of Thirds" or "Suggestion of Thirds". While composing an image along the thirds is typically a good idea, many photographs, especially those trying to portray the subject as static or monumental benefit from a symmetric composition.

While your conclusion is poignantly correct, the Rule of Thirds is only one of many laws governing the composition and perception of images. It is different from a suggestion or recommendation in that it is derived from the study of many images, over epochs at that. It is a (one) law as inherent in a store of images available to us as a law governing the natural sciences. It primarily adresses balance, not alone in the way it enhances stability and order in a given locale, but also in the way we perceive such phenomena, taking into account the forces of convention and habit.

While I am inclined to question 'conventions' without reserve, I'd tread more carefully when it comes to traditions of creating which have a scientific base. In other words, if something's rotten, it'll give. If it's sound, why knock it?

The Rule of Thirds, here, I note, has a lot of attention, perhaps because it is easy to discern. All kinds of coherences govern balance in a picture. In the end, I believe, there is no sinecure. I say, look at the picture.
Study it. Look at many pictures. Compare.

Then, if you must, vote.

OK, maybe stronger language than "suggestion" or "recomendation" is in order. Maybe "Strong Recommendation of Thirds" or "It's a Really Good Idea to Follow this Recommendation of Thirds"

Or perhaps the "rule" needs a disclaimer attached e.g. "Rule* of Thirds"

* While this rule is NOT absolute law, please make sure your image remains visually appealing should you compose your image contrary to this rule.

dsidwell

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

11/11/2003 09:18:20 AM · #21

I concur that the Rule of Thirds is a handy dandy suggestion that often makes a photo more interesting. But of course, I also agree that rules are made to be broken. In Seeking Forgiveness, I took many shots that followed the rule of thirds, but none of them worked as well as the centered composition. Just take some white paper and put the model on a third by blocking out some of the image, and you'll see what I mean. It doesn't communicate the penitent at the center of the universe trying to beg the heavens for forgiveness anymore.

Putting a subject on a 'third' node works by evoking and alluding to environment and space beyond the frame. In Quad's Sands of Time, for instance, he uses the rule of thirds here to indicate that the sands of time go way out beyond the photograph. Had the clocks been centered, the clocks would have taken the stage instead of time itself. This is why the rule of thirds is often so effective--it automatically takes the mind of the viewer beyond the photo.

If your subject deserves to be centered by its own flamboyancy, and don't want to allude to the space in which your subject resides, then don't use the rule of thirds.

In the example above, the centered cat is about the cat. In the photo following the rule of thirds, the off centered cat is about the cat in a space or environment. It's easy to put a subject on a third. It is more difficult to make sure all of that extra space evokes and alludes to a specific space that is interesting and relevant, like Quad does in his ribbon-winning photo.

That's my take, anyway.

Message edited by author 2003-11-11 09:24:51.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

11/11/2003 09:21:04 AM · #22

It is an empirical law though - so it is quite rightly called the Rule of Thirds.

Its apparent in a huge percentage of classical art and a great deal of beginning photographers would do well to at least understand the visual significance of how you locate elements within a frame impacts the message conveyed.

Certainly, once you start to understand better the usage of the wide variety of compositional approaches open to you, then you can start making more meaningful pictures that impart the feelings you want to impart. Round about that time its useful to start playing with the established conventions, but only from a point of understanding.

The supreme ignorance and arrogance is to state that you aren't constrained by any rules of composition, without even understanding why they work. The reality is that many people starting out could do well to heed the rule of thirds and other similar devices, just so that they stop using the viewfinder as a target and placing every subject in the bullseye.

The problem comes when someone learns about the rule of thirds, tries it and it works and then assumes everything has to have that structure and hasn't yet come to understand the implications of or visual weight of breaking the rules.

Simple examples: guideline: subjects should look into the frame/ have space to move through the frame
Reason: subjects moving out of the frame cause tension, feel cramped, confuses the viewer and leaves unanswered questions.

So typically, this is a good device if you say have your dog running across a field - compose on the left third, leave room for the dog to run, let your viewer know the dog is happy and running around in a lovely grassy field (that you show)

But - if you know what you are doing, you can create a lot of tension, with for example, someone running towards a cliff, placing them at the edge of the picture, running out into the unknown - 'breaking the rules' but with a purpose, and an understanding of what it communicates.

Understanding is the key. Ignorance isn't a good reason to ignore rules.

Message edited by author 2003-11-11 09:23:04.

dsidwell